State v. Jean, 372 P.3d 1019

DPS placed a warrantless GPS on a commercial truck in 2010 and monitored it for two days; officers later stopped the truck and found 2,140 pounds of marijuana in the trailer.
Jean was riding in the sleeper berth and claimed to be a driver-in-training; he was charged with money laundering, conspiracy to commit money laundering, transportation of marijuana (including for sale) and illegally conducting an enterprise.
At pretrial and trial the State introduced a 1999 Missouri incident in which Jean was found in a sleeper berth of a truck that contained ~1,774 pounds of marijuana; the court admitted that evidence under Ariz. R. Evid. 404(b).
Jean moved to suppress evidence as fruit of an illegal GPS search and argued the GPS monitoring violated his Fourth Amendment rights; the trial court denied the motion finding Jean lacked standing.
Jean moved for a mistrial after the truck owner referenced unrelated drug-transport trips during testimony; the court struck the statements and gave curative instructions but denied the mistrial.
The jury convicted Jean; the court affirmed convictions and concurrent sentences on appeal.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Admission of prior-act (Missouri) evidence under Rule 404(b)	State: prior act is proved by clear and convincing evidence, is relevant to knowledge and not overly remote or unduly prejudicial	Jean: prior act not proven, too remote (11 years), and unfairly prejudicial under Rule 403	Trial court did not abuse discretion; prior act proven, probative for knowledge, remoteness goes to weight, not admissibility; jury instructed on limited purpose
Suppression of evidence as fruit of GPS monitoring	Jean: warrantless GPS placement/monitoring was an unlawful search (Jones/mitchell) and fruits (the stop/search) should be suppressed	State: Jean lacked possessory/bailee interest in truck and thus lacked standing; short-term monitoring of a vehicle does not implicate a reasonable expectation of privacy	Jean lacked standing to challenge GPS because he was not a bailee/possessory owner; no reasonable expectation of privacy in vehicle movements as a passenger; suppression denied
Motion for mistrial based on testimony alluding to other drug trips	Jean: repeated references to other trips implied propensity and unfairly prejudiced jury; warranted mistrial	State: references were ambiguous, many related trips involved others, testimony was struck and curative instructions given	Denial of mistrial upheld; court did not abuse discretion given strikes, admonitions, and presumption juries follow instructions

United States v. Jones, 132 S. Ct. 945 (2012) (installation and use of a GPS on a vehicle can constitute a Fourth Amendment search)
State v. Mitchell, 234 Ariz. 410 (App. 2014) (following Jones; lawful possession/bailee status confers standing to challenge GPS placement)
State v. Van Adams, 194 Ariz. 408 (1999) (standard of review for Rule 404(b) admission)
State v. Prion, 203 Ariz. 157 (2002) (other-act evidence must be shown by clear and convincing evidence that defendant committed it)
United States v. Knotts, 460 U.S. 276 (1983) (no reasonable expectation of privacy in movements on public roads)
Rakas v. Illinois, 439 U.S. 128 (1978) (only persons whose own Fourth Amendment rights are violated may challenge a search)